Jump to content
  • 0

unalligned couplings

Rate this question


derek

Question

My Murphy Models carriages have couplings which are slightlly higher than those on my IRM A class. Although I can run them, it leads to quite a number of uncouplings. Very annoying. Can I swap out the MM cou[lers and is this a big job?. I,m sure I am not the only one to have come across this problem. Dont know if pics helpThanks in advance.

IMG_20230212_191451.jpg

IMG_20230212_191523.jpg

IMG_20230212_191535.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

You could try removing one of the couplers from the NEM socket and gluing a very fine silver of plastic card either underneath the coupler to raise it, or above the coupler to lower it. When dry, pop it back in.

Which one to raise or lower depends on use. Might make more sense to do one loco rather than a load of coaches, if that's all it's going to haul.

If the loco's going to haul a variety of stock, and everything is fine aside from the Mk2D's, then modifying the Mk2D couplings makes more sense.

I'm sure that @Noelhas written about this, or something similar, previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Packing the NEM pocket under the tongs of the coupling with a very thin piece of plastic card may be enough to eliminate the droop from the loco and better marry up.

I've converted most of our rolling stock from tension lock couplings to kadee couplings and needed to tweak the NEM pockets on most stock to get the couplings to the correct industry standard height. From memory the MM mk2d coaches did not have correct NEM pocket heights. MM locos were pretty spot on except for the 201 class which needed a plastic card shim to adjust the coupling height to match other stock and the kadee height gauge, or bend the trip pin to that it doesn't snag points. From memory the IRM A class locos NEM pockets were correct height, so perhaps a very thin shim wedged into the pocket with the tension lock couplings tongs would stop the droop.

Kadee19_MM_201.jpg

MM loco to MM coach

IMG_5536.jpg

Fix for cravens

fitting_kadee_mm_craven_01.jpg

  • Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

If the couplings don't recentre then the Kaydees the uncoupling function wont work correctly. The coupling are a pain to change in those coaches. Not sure why companies where there designed so  you can pull them out quite easily for replacement and then another company comes along with a slightly different solution that jut does not quite get their.

piccy with the baccy coupling inserted and now  no droop. the droop was going under other stock when being propelled.

image.png

image.png

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I found the couplings on the "A" class to be lower than the couplings on the IRM ballast wagons. I cannot shunt the ballast wagons with the "A" class as the coupling on the loco goes under the coupling on the wagon. I can shunt the wagons with the Murphy Models locos. Seems the couplings on the "A" class are a bit of an anomaly.  I posted this previously and others have the same issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, spudfan said:

I found the couplings on the "A" class to be lower than the couplings on the IRM ballast wagons. I cannot shunt the ballast wagons with the "A" class as the coupling on the loco goes under the coupling on the wagon. I can shunt the wagons with the Murphy Models locos. Seems the couplings on the "A" class are a bit of an anomaly.  I posted this previously and others have the same issue.

yep that possibly the one dissapointment on the A TBH but as I mention take out the provided one and stick on a baccy job. sorted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Thanks for the replies. George, can I ask what are "baccy couplings"?. The termonology in these replies is going over my head to be honest. I just refer to my couplers as "Hornby type". The A class I have lines up with everything else I have exept for these MM carriages. Is it possible to just remove the sprung couplers on the carriages and swap for the type on the A. thanks again......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
23 minutes ago, derek said:

Thanks for the replies. George, can I ask what are "baccy couplings"?. The termonology in these replies is going over my head to be honest. I just refer to my couplers as "Hornby type". The A class I have lines up with everything else I have exept for these MM carriages. Is it possible to just remove the sprung couplers on the carriages and swap for the type on the A. thanks again......

Baccy = Bachmann.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use